Gilberto,

I think the problem is not accuracy. I think the problem is lack of necessary extra knowledge beyond any researcher skills and their failure to admit or to understand that although any individual physical or chemical observation is critical that the other uncountable variables may overcompensate it.

For instance, satellites are observing atmosphere and land and oceans surface but what it is watching are the results. The causes the satellite is unable to "see". If you know the result but do not know the cause you may suppose that the cause is anything. I mean, does it rain because pressure went up/down, because the air is water over saturated, because the wind brought the clouds or because water evaporated from the oceans????? After you observe rain you can point any of those causes and they will give some parameters to understand why it is raining but isn't it possible that removing ocean water evaporation it would not ever rain?

About "order of magnitude", I think that if some natural phenomenon changed by one simple order of magnitude there is a catastrophe coming soon and doesn't matter what it is. But if your data is not precise or accurate, so is your order of magnitude. I mean, if you haven't precise or accurate data you do not have precise or accurate results and surely not any precise or accurate order of magnitude what means that the order of magnitude maybe even doesn't exist.

Global warming and climate changes are exactly supported on such a mistake an soon scientific community will realize this.